The Future Q -- what's your take?

kentishrev · 03-11-2015, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

But then it wouldn't use the Q-mount and thus not be a Q.

I bow to your knowledge on how these things work (I am very new to this). Is there no-way a APS-C sensor could be put into a Q-type body (as it is in the similar-sized GR) and still use the Q-mount for lenses? I only hope as I love the Q-S1, but really wish I could get the quality and crop that the GR allows. Drat the technical realities getting in the way of my dreams!

**luftfluss** · 03-11-2015, 07:40 PM

Originally posted by kentishrev

I bow to your knowledge on how these things work (I am very new to this). Is there no-way a APS-C sensor could be put into a Q-type body (as it is in the similar-sized GR) and still use the Q-mount for lenses? I only hope as I love the Q-S1, but really wish I could get the quality and crop that the GR allows. Drat the technical realities getting in the way of my dreams!

If you look at the rear lens element of a Q lens, and then look at the sensor inside the Q-S1 body, you will see that the element just barely covers the size of the sensor. There can't even be a Q with a 1" sensor that will utilize the current lens lineup.

You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's!

TedW · 03-11-2015, 08:10 PM

I just wish the Q had better lowlight performance. I swear my wife gets better pictures with her iphone indoors. I really like my Q10 but have learned not to bother indoors.

**Tony Belding** · 03-11-2015, 08:25 PM

EVF or no deal.

**luftfluss** · 03-11-2015, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by TedW

I just wish the Q had better lowlight performance. I swear my wife gets better pictures with her iphone indoors. I really like my Q10 but have learned not to bother indoors.

A couple of things come to mind:

- The iPhone might have a faster lens, and thus can shoot at lower ISO than your Q, depending on which lens you are using.

- The iPhone might be applying heavier noise reduction.

I'm pretty comfortable shooting up to ISO 800 indoors with my Q7.

**RobA_Oz** · 03-11-2015, 09:48 PM

That speed-booster idea is an interesting one. I can just see me using my A50/1.2 on my Q, with all its attendant bokeh and (hopefully) not much of its sharpness lost. Someone should be able to do that now. It's be a heftily negative lens or array, but there's substantial space to play with.

A higher-resolution sensor might be in order to maximum the benefits, but with such options, the Q might move out of the novelty area, into the (mirrorless) mainstream!

Alizarine · 03-12-2015, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by luftfluss

You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's!

the 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 VR for the Nikon 1, according to Nikon, is: Approx. 57.5 x 42mm when collapsed (weight: 115g)
the Q 5-15mm f2.8-4.5 on the other hand is 48.26 x 48.26mm (weight: 96.1g)

so the N1J4 kit lens is a little shorter but also fatter and a bit heavier. It's hard to compare systems really, but it packs a heavier punch than the Q in terms of burst speed, video features like Full HD 60fps and 720p 120fps slow-mo, hybrid AF, and probably a bigger buffer even with a bigger-resolution sensor (18.4mp)

The Q guys still have a lot of catching-up to do

drypenn · 03-12-2015, 01:48 AM - **1 Like**

For whatever worth, the iphone 5s' camera is a 4.12mm, f/2.2, 1/3" sensor size.

**luftfluss** · 03-12-2015, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by Alizarine

the 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 VR for the Nikon 1, according to Nikon, is: Approx. 57.5 x 42mm when collapsed (weight: 115g)
the Q 5-15mm f2.8-4.5 on the other hand is 48.26 x 48.26mm (weight: 96.1g)

so the N1J4 kit lens is a little shorter but also fatter and a bit heavier. It's hard to compare systems really, but it packs a heavier punch than the Q in terms of burst speed, video features like Full HD 60fps and 720p 120fps slow-mo, hybrid AF, and probably a bigger buffer even with a bigger-resolution sensor (18.4mp)

The Q guys still have a lot of catching-up to do

My concern is, how much market is there for the Q? Does Ricoh/Pentax feel that it is worth developing the system further? AFAIK, there is no better 1/1.7" sensor available... can Sony develop a successor that has more megapickles but retains all of the same characteristics of the current sensor? Why isn't there a super-long tele available, to exploit a benefit of the Q's crop factor? A 600/4 would be pretty awesome.

Q: If the Q system is designed primarily for the Japanese market, how does the Japanese consumer use the Q? Tinkerers, like so many here on PF, or just use the retail kit?

Q: Is there a benefit to Ricoh to return the Q system to its roots, with a magnesium-alloy body, and design lenses that have the build quality of the 02, rather than the flimsier construction of the 06? Make the camera simply a pleasure to hold, an object worth owning as well as worth using.

Wired · 03-12-2015, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by drypenn

For whatever worth, the iphone 5s' camera is a 4.12mm, f/2.2, 1/3" sensor size.

it would be interesting if Pentax could acquire a version of that sensor for Q use. the iPhone 5s is/was regarded as one of the, if not the best cell phone camera out there. It's buffer is quick, its FPS is very quick, and the contrast/color is generally pretty good. obviously low light not so much. But if Pentax could put their usual charm on it, what could it be when coupled with SR and the 01 lens?

The follow up is, how much of the iphone cameras performance is software or hardware based.

**luftfluss** · 03-12-2015, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by Wired

it would be interesting if Pentax could acquire a version of that sensor for Q use. the iPhone 5s is/was regarded as one of the, if not the best cell phone camera out there. It's buffer is quick, its FPS is very quick, and the contrast/color is generally pretty good. obviously low light not so much. But if Pentax could put their usual charm on it, what could it be when coupled with SR and the 01 lens?

The follow up is, how much of the iphone cameras performance is software or hardware based.

But that iPhone sensor is less than half the size of the 1/1.7" sensor in the latest Q. And everything outside of the sensor assembly itself is Apple's doing, anyway.

Wired · 03-12-2015, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

But that iPhone sensor is less than half the size of the 1/1.7" sensor in the latest Q. And everything outside of the sensor assembly itself is Apple's doing, anyway.

A larger chip variant of that sensor may be interesting. The thing is how much of the iphones quality is based on the sensor, the lens, or software?

Pioneer · 03-12-2015, 12:30 PM

New Q Wishlist?

1. WR
2. EVF
3. WiFi
4. Higher resolution rear display
5. Return to original magnesium body.

Just the top three would make me happy.

Also, don't forget to build that really nice macro lens you promised.

**monochrome** · 03-12-2015, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Pioneer

New Q Wishlist?

1. WR
2. EVF
3. WiFi
4. Higher resolution rear display
5. Return to original magnesium body.

Just the top three would make me happy.

Also, don't forget to build that really nice macro lens you promised.

How much would you/we pay for that camera?

IIRC the original Q was laughed out of the party because it was 'overpriced'. The plastic-body Q10 was the response and the Q7 was the upgrade cycle camera.

I personally would like a q-style camera with GR DNA (IOW an interchangeable lens GR).

Tanzer · 03-12-2015, 12:39 PM

Just had another thought, along the lines of the Speedbooster .... It would be kinda funny for someone to come up with a mFT or Nikon 1-mount to Q adapter. mFT and Nikon 1 bodies are kind of "selfish" in that they can use almost everyone else's lenses, but you can't put mFT or Nikon 1 lenses on any other bodies since the flange distance is so short -- but they could work on a Q!

Sony E-mount lenses wouldn't offer any advantage over Pentax APSC lenses, it would be more about bragging rights. (Take that, Sony fanboys!

)

The mFT and Nikon 1 systems are a bit closer in terms of usual focal length, size, and weight to the Q system, so those would make a little more sense than adapting APSC lenses. It should be quite easy for Metabones and the other manufacturers to create a focal length reducer to go from mFT or Nikon 1 to the Q mount.

One problem, I suppose, is that the mFT lenses require an active electronic mount in order to power the focus-by-wire system. And one problem with the Nikon 1 system is that it doesn't have many lenses, so there wouldn't be much of an accessible market. So maybe this is a dumb idea .... Threadjack over.

03-11-2015, 07:40 PM	#17
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by kentishrev I bow to your knowledge on how these things work (I am very new to this). Is there no-way a APS-C sensor could be put into a Q-type body (as it is in the similar-sized GR) and still use the Q-mount for lenses? I only hope as I love the Q-S1, but really wish I could get the quality and crop that the GR allows. Drat the technical realities getting in the way of my dreams! If you look at the rear lens element of a Q lens, and then look at the sensor inside the Q-S1 body, you will see that the element just barely covers the size of the sensor. There can't even be a Q with a 1" sensor that will utilize the current lens lineup. You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's! Last edited by luftfluss; 03-11-2015 at 07:52 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What is your take on the Da 70 vs Fa77 or the upstart Samyang 85?	Canmannac	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	01-03-2014 11:52 AM
What's the weirdest thing that's ever been in your camera bag?	ASheffield	General Talk	50	11-26-2013 05:11 AM
What's the first thing you did with your Q when it arrived?	Lowell Goudge	Pentax Q	22	04-18-2013 03:24 AM
What's your support for your Q?	Clicker	Pentax Q	4	05-03-2012 10:59 AM
New-York trip: what shot do you take ? what's the best spot?	TanGU	Photographic Technique	47	07-24-2010 08:55 AM

03-11-2015, 04:34 PM	#16
kentishrev Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 180	Originally posted by luftfluss But then it wouldn't use the Q-mount and thus not be a Q. I bow to your knowledge on how these things work (I am very new to this). Is there no-way a APS-C sensor could be put into a Q-type body (as it is in the similar-sized GR) and still use the Q-mount for lenses? I only hope as I love the Q-S1, but really wish I could get the quality and crop that the GR allows. Drat the technical realities getting in the way of my dreams!

03-11-2015, 08:10 PM	#18
TedW Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 241	I just wish the Q had better lowlight performance. I swear my wife gets better pictures with her iphone indoors. I really like my Q10 but have learned not to bother indoors.

03-11-2015, 08:25 PM	#19
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 777	EVF or no deal.

03-11-2015, 08:37 PM	#20
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by TedW I just wish the Q had better lowlight performance. I swear my wife gets better pictures with her iphone indoors. I really like my Q10 but have learned not to bother indoors. A couple of things come to mind: - The iPhone might have a faster lens, and thus can shoot at lower ISO than your Q, depending on which lens you are using. - The iPhone might be applying heavier noise reduction. I'm pretty comfortable shooting up to ISO 800 indoors with my Q7.

03-11-2015, 09:48 PM	#21
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,191	That speed-booster idea is an interesting one. I can just see me using my A50/1.2 on my Q, with all its attendant bokeh and (hopefully) not much of its sharpness lost. Someone should be able to do that now. It's be a heftily negative lens or array, but there's substantial space to play with. A higher-resolution sensor might be in order to maximum the benefits, but with such options, the Q might move out of the novelty area, into the (mirrorless) mainstream!

03-12-2015, 01:01 AM	#22
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185 Original Poster	Originally posted by luftfluss You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's! the 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 VR for the Nikon 1, according to Nikon, is: Approx. 57.5 x 42mm when collapsed (weight: 115g) the Q 5-15mm f2.8-4.5 on the other hand is 48.26 x 48.26mm (weight: 96.1g) so the N1J4 kit lens is a little shorter but also fatter and a bit heavier. It's hard to compare systems really, but it packs a heavier punch than the Q in terms of burst speed, video features like Full HD 60fps and 720p 120fps slow-mo, hybrid AF, and probably a bigger buffer even with a bigger-resolution sensor (18.4mp) The Q guys still have a lot of catching-up to do

03-12-2015, 01:48 AM - 1 Like	#23
drypenn Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 963	For whatever worth, the iphone 5s' camera is a 4.12mm, f/2.2, 1/3" sensor size.

03-12-2015, 08:24 AM	#24
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by Alizarine the 10-30mm f3.5-5.6 VR for the Nikon 1, according to Nikon, is: Approx. 57.5 x 42mm when collapsed (weight: 115g) the Q 5-15mm f2.8-4.5 on the other hand is 48.26 x 48.26mm (weight: 96.1g) so the N1J4 kit lens is a little shorter but also fatter and a bit heavier. It's hard to compare systems really, but it packs a heavier punch than the Q in terms of burst speed, video features like Full HD 60fps and 720p 120fps slow-mo, hybrid AF, and probably a bigger buffer even with a bigger-resolution sensor (18.4mp) The Q guys still have a lot of catching-up to do My concern is, how much market is there for the Q? Does Ricoh/Pentax feel that it is worth developing the system further? AFAIK, there is no better 1/1.7" sensor available... can Sony develop a successor that has more megapickles but retains all of the same characteristics of the current sensor? Why isn't there a super-long tele available, to exploit a benefit of the Q's crop factor? A 600/4 would be pretty awesome. Q: If the Q system is designed primarily for the Japanese market, how does the Japanese consumer use the Q? Tinkerers, like so many here on PF, or just use the retail kit? Q: Is there a benefit to Ricoh to return the Q system to its roots, with a magnesium-alloy body, and design lenses that have the build quality of the 02, rather than the flimsier construction of the 06? Make the camera simply a pleasure to hold, an object worth owning as well as worth using.

03-12-2015, 11:42 AM	#25
Wired Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,519	Originally posted by drypenn For whatever worth, the iphone 5s' camera is a 4.12mm, f/2.2, 1/3" sensor size. it would be interesting if Pentax could acquire a version of that sensor for Q use. the iPhone 5s is/was regarded as one of the, if not the best cell phone camera out there. It's buffer is quick, its FPS is very quick, and the contrast/color is generally pretty good. obviously low light not so much. But if Pentax could put their usual charm on it, what could it be when coupled with SR and the 01 lens? The follow up is, how much of the iphone cameras performance is software or hardware based.

03-12-2015, 12:21 PM	#26
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by Wired it would be interesting if Pentax could acquire a version of that sensor for Q use. the iPhone 5s is/was regarded as one of the, if not the best cell phone camera out there. It's buffer is quick, its FPS is very quick, and the contrast/color is generally pretty good. obviously low light not so much. But if Pentax could put their usual charm on it, what could it be when coupled with SR and the 01 lens? The follow up is, how much of the iphone cameras performance is software or hardware based. But that iPhone sensor is less than half the size of the 1/1.7" sensor in the latest Q. And everything outside of the sensor assembly itself is Apple's doing, anyway.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-12-2015, 12:23 PM	#27
Wired Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,519	Originally posted by luftfluss But that iPhone sensor is less than half the size of the 1/1.7" sensor in the latest Q. And everything outside of the sensor assembly itself is Apple's doing, anyway. A larger chip variant of that sensor may be interesting. The thing is how much of the iphones quality is based on the sensor, the lens, or software?

03-12-2015, 12:30 PM	#28
Pioneer Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Wandering the Streets Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,411	New Q Wishlist? 1. WR 2. EVF 3. WiFi 4. Higher resolution rear display 5. Return to original magnesium body. Just the top three would make me happy. Also, don't forget to build that really nice macro lens you promised.

03-12-2015, 12:35 PM	#29
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Pioneer New Q Wishlist? 1. WR 2. EVF 3. WiFi 4. Higher resolution rear display 5. Return to original magnesium body. Just the top three would make me happy. Also, don't forget to build that really nice macro lens you promised. How much would you/we pay for that camera? IIRC the original Q was laughed out of the party because it was 'overpriced'. The plastic-body Q10 was the response and the Q7 was the upgrade cycle camera. I personally would like a q-style camera with GR DNA (IOW an interchangeable lens GR).

03-12-2015, 12:39 PM	#30
Tanzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Perrineville, NJ Posts: 1,375	Just had another thought, along the lines of the Speedbooster .... It would be kinda funny for someone to come up with a mFT or Nikon 1-mount to Q adapter. mFT and Nikon 1 bodies are kind of "selfish" in that they can use almost everyone else's lenses, but you can't put mFT or Nikon 1 lenses on any other bodies since the flange distance is so short -- but they could work on a Q! Sony E-mount lenses wouldn't offer any advantage over Pentax APSC lenses, it would be more about bragging rights. (Take that, Sony fanboys! ) The mFT and Nikon 1 systems are a bit closer in terms of usual focal length, size, and weight to the Q system, so those would make a little more sense than adapting APSC lenses. It should be quite easy for Metabones and the other manufacturers to create a focal length reducer to go from mFT or Nikon 1 to the Q mount. One problem, I suppose, is that the mFT lenses require an active electronic mount in order to power the focus-by-wire system. And one problem with the Nikon 1 system is that it doesn't have many lenses, so there wouldn't be much of an accessible market. So maybe this is a dumb idea .... Threadjack over.